Purpose: We wanted to compare the results between cadaveric and radiological measurements of calcaneus. Materials and Methods: Sixty three calcaneus of 33 cadavers donated between December 2012 and December 2014 were actually measured. Computed tomography (CT) images of 244 calcaneus in 122 patients of the same age group with cadavers were radiologically measured. Maximum length, maximum width, maximum height, $B{\ddot{o}}hler$ angle, Gissane angle, Fowler-Phillip angle, and tala-articular angle were measured. Results: In cadaveric measurement, the mean maximal height, length, and width were $41.8{\pm}3.3mm$, $73.3{\pm}3.4mm$, and $40.7{\pm}2.2mm$, respectively. In radiological measurement, the mean maximal height, length, and width were $38.5{\pm}4.3mm$, $74.0{\pm}5.7mm$, and $44.7{\pm}1.4mm$, respectively. In cadaveric measurement, the mean $B\ddot{o}hler$ angle, Gissane angle, Fowler-Phillip angle, and tala-articular angle were $32.1^{\circ}{\pm}6.2^{\circ}$, $110.8^{\circ}{\pm}8.1^{\circ}$, $55.8^{\circ}{\pm}6.8^{\circ}$, and $59.7^{\circ}{\pm}4.6^{\circ}$, respectively. In radiological measurement the mean $B{\ddot{o}}hler$ angle, Gissane angle, Fowler-Phillip angle, and tala-articular angle were $32.6^{\circ}{\pm}3.8^{\circ}$, $113.7^{\circ}{\pm}5.7^{\circ}$, $62.2^{\circ}{\pm}3.9^{\circ}$, and $61.6^{\circ}{\pm}6.3^{\circ}$, respectively. The mean maximal height was significantly higher in the cadaveric measurement group (p<0.001) and the mean maximal length and width were significantly higher in the radiologic measurement group (p<0.001, p<0.001). The mean Gissane angle, Fowler-Philip angle, and $B{\ddot{o}}hler$ angle were significantly higher in the CT group (p=0.001, p<0.001, p=0.016, respectively). There was no significant difference in the mean tala-articular angle (p=0.352). Conclusion: Significant differences in length parameters were observed between the cadaveric measurement group and the radiologic measurement group. However, no significant differences in angular measurements were observed between the two groups. The authors carefully conclude that radiological measurement values may be different from actual values in the calcaneus.